On Wed, 12 Dec 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
> Title: s/avalability/availability/
>
> On 12/12/2018 16:55, Andrii Anisov wrote:
> > From: Andrii Anisov
> >
> > An IRQ with _IRQ_GUEST flag set always has an action.
> > An IRQ with _IRQ_DISABLED flag cleared always have an action.
>
> s/have/has/
>
On 12/12/2018 17:59, Andrii Anisov wrote:
On 12.12.18 19:49, Julien Grall wrote:
Those conditions are not sufficient to ensure desc->action is not NULL. You
also need to take the spinlock.
Agree. Should I describe it as following?
Under desc->lock taken:
An IRQ with _IRQ_GUEST flag set
On 12.12.18 19:49, Julien Grall wrote:
Those conditions are not sufficient to ensure desc->action is not NULL. You
also need to take the spinlock.
Agree. Should I describe it as following?
Under desc->lock taken:
An IRQ with _IRQ_GUEST flag set always has an action.
An IRQ with _IRQ_DISABLED
On 12.12.18 19:49, Julien Grall wrote:
Please don't add a reviewed-by tag until it was explicitly written by the
reviewer.
My bad, I mixed it with #5.
--
Sincerely,
Andrii Anisov.
___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Title: s/avalability/availability/
On 12/12/2018 16:55, Andrii Anisov wrote:
From: Andrii Anisov
An IRQ with _IRQ_GUEST flag set always has an action.
An IRQ with _IRQ_DISABLED flag cleared always have an action.
s/have/has/
Those conditions are not sufficient to ensure desc->action is not
From: Andrii Anisov
An IRQ with _IRQ_GUEST flag set always has an action.
An IRQ with _IRQ_DISABLED flag cleared always have an action.
Those flags checks cover all accesses to desc->action in do_IRQ,
so we can skip desc->action check.
Still keep it in place for debug build.
Signed-off-by:
